Does the confrontation clause of the Constitution make tickets from speed and red light cameras unenforcable?

[msc545]

You have a right to confront your accuser. WIth automated cameras there is no accuser who witnessed your crime, just a camera that cannot talk.

[lightbulb27]

I say yes. what I'd approve is an automated system that pings your car (required by law to be in the car and enabled, just like stop lights). going to fast... get a warning. Fail to heed the warning, escalates to a human that looks at the evidence and sends a "Zap em" signal. Automatically charges them. If they want to fight it, have to go to court.

If they lose in court, they are paddled, or they can pay the $1000 fine.

or $10,000 whatever... with enough inflation, it will be $10,000

[exitseven]

The photos are used as evidence to prosecute the crime. It is the cops or the clerk magistrate that are doing the accusing. The evidence is similar to using a radar gun. I think that if you go to court and face your accuser 9 times out of ten they dismiss the ticket. I have fought the law and I was the one that won.

[exitseven]

Thanks for the MHO😎

[Anonymous]

It's the 6th Amendment which says, you have the right "to be confronted with the witnesses against [you]" and the Supreme Court has held video evidence of your own actions are a witness against you.

[Anonymous]

Depends on the judge. So much depends on the judge you get.

[KrakenAttackin]

I hate automated ticket writers. I guess if you have a court date they can rationalize the right to confront your accuser... which is bullshit.

[NathanDavis]

you confront the government... over the evidence

[msc545]

There is no evidence that is admissable. Video from an unattended camera is hearsay.

[msc545]

There also are no witnesses to confront.

[BoopBoopBeep]

Video is usually considered demonstrative evidence, which makes it not hearsay or subject to cross-ex once the video is authenticated. That said I think cameras are BS because good luck subpoenaing one when the facts/evidence is on YOUR side.

[BoopBoopBeep]

@msc545
Yep... that's why I hate DC.

[msc545]

Does DC have speed or red light cameras? I've never been there so I'm not sure...

[ProbablyClueless]

No, unfortunately those tickets are still enforceable because the police officer who approves the ticket is your accuser.

[msc545]

Police officer can't be the accuser unless he saw what happened. Just because he saw a video doesn't mean he can accuse you of anything.

[goaded]

Nah. You can confront the person who examines the photographic evidence.

[msc545]

Anything with that person says would be hearsay because they didn't actually see you run the red light or whatever the violation supposedly was.

[goaded]

Most murderers are convicted on less evidence.

[msc545]

That is not really the point and it also isn't true. Have you ever been involved in a murder trial?

[Anonymous]

No. The state is the accuser. The camera just provides the evidence. The DA who is nailing your ass to the wall for violating traffic laws is your accuser. You're free to confront him but you better have some compelling counter-evidence.

[Snakeyes7]

It definitely violates the 4th amendment.